The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures
In recent years, most states have constructed elaborate accountability systems using school-level test scores. However, because the median elementary school contains only 69 children per grade level, such measures are quite imprecise. We evaluate the implications for school accountability systems. F...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of economic perspectives 2002-10, Vol.16 (4), p.91-114 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 114 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 91 |
container_title | The Journal of economic perspectives |
container_volume | 16 |
creator | Kane, Thomas J. Staiger, Douglas O. |
description | In recent years, most states have constructed elaborate accountability systems using school-level test scores. However, because the median elementary school contains only 69 children per grade level, such measures are quite imprecise. We evaluate the implications for school accountability systems. For instance, rewards or sanctions for schools with scores at either extreme primarily affect small schools and provide weak incentives to large ones. Nevertheless, we conclude that accountability systems may be worthwhile. Even in states with aggressive financial incentives, the marginal reward to schools for raising student performance is a small fraction of the potential labor market value for students. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1257/089533002320950993 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_39236591</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>3216916</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>3216916</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-2cf68f04d2f1f913402e1a00dca3183aa59ba8d972660976a2a0387e7d9c5b3a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNplkD1PwzAQhi0EEqXwBxCDxcAWOPtixx6rio-iIirRzpHrODRVGhc7GfrvSVTEALfccM_z6vQScs3gnnGRPYDSAhGAIwctQGs8ISOm0zTJtBSnZDQASU_oc3IR4xaGkWJEXpcbRxfB76roqGkKuqja0tR1pL6kq1g1n3S22wdnh_uH3Xhf04m1vmtas67qqj3QN2diF1y8JGe9Gd3Vzx6T1dPjcvqSzN-fZ9PJPLEpQptwW0pVQlrwkpWaYQrcMQNQWINMoTFCr40qdMalBJ1Jww2gylxWaCvWaHBM7o65--C_OhfbvH_euro2jfNdzFFzlKJPHpPbP-DWd6Hpf8s546CUEqqH-BGywccYXJnvQ7Uz4ZAzyIdu8__d9tLNUdrG1odfAzmTmkn8Biefc_A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>212088858</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>American Economic Association Web</source><creator>Kane, Thomas J. ; Staiger, Douglas O.</creator><creatorcontrib>Kane, Thomas J. ; Staiger, Douglas O.</creatorcontrib><description>In recent years, most states have constructed elaborate accountability systems using school-level test scores. However, because the median elementary school contains only 69 children per grade level, such measures are quite imprecise. We evaluate the implications for school accountability systems. For instance, rewards or sanctions for schools with scores at either extreme primarily affect small schools and provide weak incentives to large ones. Nevertheless, we conclude that accountability systems may be worthwhile. Even in states with aggressive financial incentives, the marginal reward to schools for raising student performance is a small fraction of the potential labor market value for students.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0895-3309</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-7965</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1257/089533002320950993</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Nashville: American Economic Association</publisher><subject>Academic achievement ; Accountability ; Achievement tests ; Awards & honors ; Economic sanctions ; Economic theory ; Economics ; Education systems ; Elementary schools ; Incentives ; Low income groups ; Mathematical aptitude ; Mathematics tests ; Monetary incentives ; No Child Left Behind Act 2001-US ; Performance evaluation ; Public schools ; Sanctions ; Schools ; Small schools ; Standard deviation ; Statistical variance ; Students ; Test scores ; U.S.A</subject><ispartof>The Journal of economic perspectives, 2002-10, Vol.16 (4), p.91-114</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2002 American Economic Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Economic Association Fall 2002</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-2cf68f04d2f1f913402e1a00dca3183aa59ba8d972660976a2a0387e7d9c5b3a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-2cf68f04d2f1f913402e1a00dca3183aa59ba8d972660976a2a0387e7d9c5b3a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3216916$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/3216916$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,3735,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kane, Thomas J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Staiger, Douglas O.</creatorcontrib><title>The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures</title><title>The Journal of economic perspectives</title><description>In recent years, most states have constructed elaborate accountability systems using school-level test scores. However, because the median elementary school contains only 69 children per grade level, such measures are quite imprecise. We evaluate the implications for school accountability systems. For instance, rewards or sanctions for schools with scores at either extreme primarily affect small schools and provide weak incentives to large ones. Nevertheless, we conclude that accountability systems may be worthwhile. Even in states with aggressive financial incentives, the marginal reward to schools for raising student performance is a small fraction of the potential labor market value for students.</description><subject>Academic achievement</subject><subject>Accountability</subject><subject>Achievement tests</subject><subject>Awards & honors</subject><subject>Economic sanctions</subject><subject>Economic theory</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>Education systems</subject><subject>Elementary schools</subject><subject>Incentives</subject><subject>Low income groups</subject><subject>Mathematical aptitude</subject><subject>Mathematics tests</subject><subject>Monetary incentives</subject><subject>No Child Left Behind Act 2001-US</subject><subject>Performance evaluation</subject><subject>Public schools</subject><subject>Sanctions</subject><subject>Schools</subject><subject>Small schools</subject><subject>Standard deviation</subject><subject>Statistical variance</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Test scores</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><issn>0895-3309</issn><issn>1944-7965</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>JFNAL</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNplkD1PwzAQhi0EEqXwBxCDxcAWOPtixx6rio-iIirRzpHrODRVGhc7GfrvSVTEALfccM_z6vQScs3gnnGRPYDSAhGAIwctQGs8ISOm0zTJtBSnZDQASU_oc3IR4xaGkWJEXpcbRxfB76roqGkKuqja0tR1pL6kq1g1n3S22wdnh_uH3Xhf04m1vmtas67qqj3QN2diF1y8JGe9Gd3Vzx6T1dPjcvqSzN-fZ9PJPLEpQptwW0pVQlrwkpWaYQrcMQNQWINMoTFCr40qdMalBJ1Jww2gylxWaCvWaHBM7o65--C_OhfbvH_euro2jfNdzFFzlKJPHpPbP-DWd6Hpf8s546CUEqqH-BGywccYXJnvQ7Uz4ZAzyIdu8__d9tLNUdrG1odfAzmTmkn8Biefc_A</recordid><startdate>20021001</startdate><enddate>20021001</enddate><creator>Kane, Thomas J.</creator><creator>Staiger, Douglas O.</creator><general>American Economic Association</general><scope>JFNAL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20021001</creationdate><title>The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures</title><author>Kane, Thomas J. ; Staiger, Douglas O.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c430t-2cf68f04d2f1f913402e1a00dca3183aa59ba8d972660976a2a0387e7d9c5b3a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Academic achievement</topic><topic>Accountability</topic><topic>Achievement tests</topic><topic>Awards & honors</topic><topic>Economic sanctions</topic><topic>Economic theory</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>Education systems</topic><topic>Elementary schools</topic><topic>Incentives</topic><topic>Low income groups</topic><topic>Mathematical aptitude</topic><topic>Mathematics tests</topic><topic>Monetary incentives</topic><topic>No Child Left Behind Act 2001-US</topic><topic>Performance evaluation</topic><topic>Public schools</topic><topic>Sanctions</topic><topic>Schools</topic><topic>Small schools</topic><topic>Standard deviation</topic><topic>Statistical variance</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Test scores</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kane, Thomas J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Staiger, Douglas O.</creatorcontrib><collection>Jstor Journals Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of economic perspectives</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kane, Thomas J.</au><au>Staiger, Douglas O.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of economic perspectives</jtitle><date>2002-10-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>91</spage><epage>114</epage><pages>91-114</pages><issn>0895-3309</issn><eissn>1944-7965</eissn><abstract>In recent years, most states have constructed elaborate accountability systems using school-level test scores. However, because the median elementary school contains only 69 children per grade level, such measures are quite imprecise. We evaluate the implications for school accountability systems. For instance, rewards or sanctions for schools with scores at either extreme primarily affect small schools and provide weak incentives to large ones. Nevertheless, we conclude that accountability systems may be worthwhile. Even in states with aggressive financial incentives, the marginal reward to schools for raising student performance is a small fraction of the potential labor market value for students.</abstract><cop>Nashville</cop><pub>American Economic Association</pub><doi>10.1257/089533002320950993</doi><tpages>24</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0895-3309 |
ispartof | The Journal of economic perspectives, 2002-10, Vol.16 (4), p.91-114 |
issn | 0895-3309 1944-7965 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_39236591 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Business Source Complete; American Economic Association Web |
subjects | Academic achievement Accountability Achievement tests Awards & honors Economic sanctions Economic theory Economics Education systems Elementary schools Incentives Low income groups Mathematical aptitude Mathematics tests Monetary incentives No Child Left Behind Act 2001-US Performance evaluation Public schools Sanctions Schools Small schools Standard deviation Statistical variance Students Test scores U.S.A |
title | The Promise and Pitfalls of Using Imprecise School Accountability Measures |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T01%3A52%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Promise%20and%20Pitfalls%20of%20Using%20Imprecise%20School%20Accountability%20Measures&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20economic%20perspectives&rft.au=Kane,%20Thomas%20J.&rft.date=2002-10-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=91&rft.epage=114&rft.pages=91-114&rft.issn=0895-3309&rft.eissn=1944-7965&rft_id=info:doi/10.1257/089533002320950993&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E3216916%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=212088858&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=3216916&rfr_iscdi=true |